You are on page 1of 7

www.verizonaonlinepublishing.

com
Vol: 1, Issue: 3

Journal of Robotics and Mechanical Engineering Research


Air Craft Winglet Design and Performance: Cant Angle Effect
Eslam Said Abdelghany 1, Essam E Khalil2*, Osama E Abdellatif 3 and Gamal elhariry 4
1
Lecturer, Institute of Aviation Engineering, Cairo, Egypt
2
Professor of Mechanical Engineering, Cairo University, Egypt
3
Professor of Mechanical Engineering, Benha University, Egypt
4
Lecturer of Mechanical Engineering. Cairo University, Egypt

*Corresponding author: Essam E. Khalil, Professor of Mechanical Engineering, Cairo University, Egypt; E mail: khalil_ceb@yahoo.com
Article Type: Research, Submission Date: 01 February 2016, Accepted Date: 25 February 2016, Published Date: 08 March 2016.
Citation: Eslam Said Abdelghany, Essam E Khalil, Osama E Abdellatif and Gamal elhariry (2016) Air Craft Winglet Design and
Performance: Cant Angle Effect. J Robot Mech Eng Resr 1(3): 28-34.
Copyright: © 2016 Essam E. Khalil, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and
source are credited.

Abstract Introduction
A winglet is a device used to improve the efficiency of aircraft by Most of the commercial long range aircraft has installed winglet to
lowering the lift induced drag caused by wingtip vortices. It is a decrease the induce drag to save more fuel [1], this feature can be
vertical or angled extension at the tips of each wing. Winglets also found on the bird. Bird use its feather at wingtip as “multiple
improve efficiency by diffusing the shed wingtip vortex, which winglet” [2] and [3], which can be seen Figure 1. Each feather has
in turn reduces the drag due to lift and improves the wing’s lift different angle with respect to the wing, and they are passively
over drag ratio Winglets increase the effective aspect ratio of a adapted to the different flight conditions, which is different from
wing without adding greatly to the structural stress and hence the fixed angle winglet in the conventional aircraft.
necessary weight of its structure. In this research, a numerical No single shaping of winglets stands out as an optimal geometry
validation procedure (by FLUENT ®, computational fluid [4], as long as the general guidelines of cant angle, sweep angle,
dynamics software with The Spalart-Allmaras turbulence model) twist angle, sufficient taper ratio, aerofoil type and length of
is described for determination and estimation aerodynamic winglet [5]. The selected geometry of the winglet is taken as the
characteristics of three dimension subsonic rectangular wing generalized cant-and sweep-angle (WCSA) (also called wing
(with NACA653218airfoil cross section). It was observed that with winglet cant-sweep angle) type, as shown in Figure 2.
at the present work a good agreement between the numerical
study and the experimental work. This paper describes a CFD Governing Equations
3-dimensional winglets analysis that was performed on a Cessna The air flow is typically modelled as 3-D compressible
wing of NACA2412 cross sectional airfoil. The wing has span viscous flow. Thus the governing equations are the continuity
13.16 m, root chord 1.857 m, tip chord 0.928 m, sweep angle 11 equation together with x, y and z- Navier-Stokes equations for
degree and taper ratio 0.5. The present study shows wing without a compressible flow. Turbulence is modelled by the Spalart-
winglet and wing with winglet at cant angle 0, 30 and 45 degree. Allmaras model. The complete system of equations is presented
A CFD simulation performs by to compare of aerodynamics here in the differential form, FLUENT® Documentation [7] and
characteristics of lift coefficient CL, drag coefficient CD and lift [8]. The governing equations in this model are:
to drag ratio, L/D lift, pathlines and pressure contours. The
models run at a Mach number of 0.2 at sea level. The pressure a. Continuity equation in vector form:
and temperature of air at this height are 101.325 kPa and 288.2
K respectively. The results show that the wing with winglet can
increase the lift by ratio approximately 12%. The wing with
winglet can decrease the drag by ratio approximately 4%. The b. Momentum equation in vector form:
wing with winglet can increase lift to drag, L/D by about 11%
along different phases of flight.
Keywords: CFD, Winglet, Induce drag, Lift, Vortices, Cant angle. c. Energy Conservation Equation:

J Robot Mech Eng Resr 1(3). Page | 28


Citation: Eslam Said Abdelghany, Essam E Khalil, Osama E Abdellatif and Gamal elhariry (2016) Air Craft Winglet Design and Performance: Cant
Angle Effect. J Robot Mech Eng Resr 1(3): 28-34.

The numerical model of a rectangular wing with NACA653218airfoil


section with boundary condition is illustrated here in Figure 4.
The mesh is generated using GAMBIT® 2.3.16 as a pre-processor
and mesh generator. It is very crucial that the grid size be as small
as possible at boundaries (at the wing walls [block 1]). However,
it is also important that the grid volumes be as large as possible
to reduce the solution time and allocated memory [blocks 2, 3, 4,
Figure 1: A bird’s wing during flight [2] 5, 6], as shown in Figure 5.
Tip chord of winglet (Ct)
Cant angle Sweep angle
g
q

Winglet length (L)

a) Front view of wing with winglet b) Side view of wing with winglet

Twist angle (d )

c)Isometric view of wing with winglet


Figure 2: Winglet shape parameters; (a) Front view of wing with winglet shown cant angle; (b) Top view of
wing with winglet shown sweep angle; (c) Isometric view of wing with winglet shown sweep angle

Validation Code Procedures


The computational steps in this work consist of three stages. The
work began from pre-processing stage of geometry setup and
grid generation. The geometry of the model and the grid was
generated by GAMBIT. The second stage was the computational
simulation by FLUENT solver using Finite Volume Approach.
Finally is the post-processing stage where the aerodynamics
characteristics of rectangular wing with NACA653218 airfoil
were performed. From CFD model one can determine lift, drag,
pitching moment coefficient, pressure contours, velocity contours
and pathlines around wing at all AOA.
Geometry and Grids
First draw rectangular wing with NACA 653218airfoil by using
Gambit. The wing has chord length 121 mm and semi-span
330mm. In order to obtain accurate lift, drag, and pitching
moment on wing, the utilized grid nodes near the wing volume
must be dense enough and the computed fields must be
large enough to satisfy the far field boundary conditions. 3D
unstructured tetrahedral mesh is used for complex shape of
winglet. In the present work multi-block unstructured grid was Figure 3: Front view computed flow field for Rectangular wing with
used to increase grids near wing volume by creating blocks 1, 2, NACA653218airfoil section
3, 4, 5 and 6, as shown in Figure 3.
J Robot Mech Eng Resr 1(3). Page | 29
Citation: Eslam Said Abdelghany, Essam E Khalil, Osama E Abdellatif and Gamal elhariry (2016) Air Craft Winglet Design and Performance: Cant
Angle Effect. J Robot Mech Eng Resr 1(3): 28-34.

Figure 4: Numerical model of NACA653218 rectangular wing

Figure 6: Predicted lift coefficient at angle of attack 12° against


number of grid cells
Figure 5: Front and side views of meshed control volume

Grid dependency check of lift and drag coefficient with the corresponding values in the
experimental and numerical models measurements.
The first step in performing a CFD simulation should be to
investigate the effect of the mesh size on the solution results. Effect of Winglet with CANT Angle 0, 30 and 45 Degrees
Generally, a numerical solution becomes more accurate as The present analyses were carried for three cases: a simple
more cells are used, but using additional cells also increases Cessna swept back wing, with no winglets, the same wing with
the required computer memory and computational time. To winglet at Cant angle (θ) 0, 30 and 45 degree at constant Sweep
examine the independency of the results to cell number, seven angle (γ) 0 degree. The wing has chord length 1.857 m with
mesh types were generated. The results of these seven meshes NACA2412airfoil is extruding by 5.7 m. the wing taper ratio is
are shown in Figure 6, Lift coefficient with number of grid cell at 0.5 and leading edge sweep back angle 11 degree to create wing
angle of attack (12°).the time for 500000 was about 2 hrs and the volume. The winglets have the same aerofoil of wing and length
time for 1500000 was about 8 hrs. 20% of semi span with sharp edge connection with wingtip, see
In order to save time when running the computations, the grid in Figure 7. These cases all have the same initial conditions. Since
with the smallest number of cells displaying an independent wingtip vortices are more prevalent at take-off conditions for low
solution should be used for the calculations. This is seen to be the speed and high lift conditions, the wings will be run at a Mach
case for a grid with around 1500000 cells. The Rectangular wing number of 0.2 at sea level. The pressure and temperature of air at
with NACA653218airfoil section model was used to verify the this height are 101.325 kPa and 288.2 K respectively.
work reported by [6], [9]. Comparing the results of the numerical Results and Discussion
model by Spalart-Allmaras model to those of the experimental
and numerical models measurements indicated good agreement From CFD model one can, typically, determine lift, drag, pressure

J Robot Mech Eng Resr 1(3). Page | 30


Citation: Eslam Said Abdelghany, Essam E Khalil, Osama E Abdellatif and Gamal elhariry (2016) Air Craft Winglet Design and Performance: Cant
Angle Effect. J Robot Mech Eng Resr 1(3): 28-34.

with the increase of the angle of attack; the effect of wings with
different winglet is not important at 0 degree angle of attack due
to low induced drag and the wings with winglet have more surface
area, which caused the friction drag to increase. At high angle of
attack, the induced drag increase and then the effect of winglet
increase to reducing induced drag. It was found that the lowest
drag coefficient; CD is WCSA-45-00 about 1.5% to 3.5% with
angle of attack compared to wing without winglet. The WCSA-
30-00 gives the second lowest drag coefficient, CD about 1% to
3.2% with angle of attack compare to wing without winglet.

Table 2: Drag Coefficient, CD wing with winglet at cant angle 0, 30, 45


degree and sweep angle 0 degree
Figure 7: Wing with winglet at cant angle 0, 30 and 45 degree and at Winglet configuration α=0° α=4° α=8° α=12°
sweep angle 0 degree
WCSA-00-00 0.01677 0.02582 0.04866 0.08314
contours and pathlines around wing at all angles of attack AOA. WCSA-30-00 0.01573 0.02446 0.047172 0.08159
Lift Coefficient, CL Analysis WCSA-45-00 0.01571 0.02439 0.04717 0.08150
From Table 1 and Figure 8, it is observed that the lift increases
with increase in angle of attack. Show the wings with winglets
have higher lift coefficient, CL than wing without winglet about
5% to 12% with angle of attack. The WCSA-00-00 has highest lift
coefficient then WCSA-30-00 and WCSA-45-00 at angles of attack
0 and 4 degree then WCSA-45-00 is highest lift coefficient.
Drag Coefficient, CD Analysis
From Table 2 and Figure 9, it is observed that the drag increases
Table 1: Lift Coefficient, CL Wing with winglet at cant angle 0, 30, 45
degree and sweep angle 0 degree

Winglet
α=0° α=4° α=8° α=12°
configuration Figure 9: Predicted Drag coefficient, CD versus angle of attack, α, for
Wing with winglet at cant angle 0, 30, 45 degree and sweep angle 0
WCSA-00-00 0.15004 0.41157 0.64555 0.81786 degree with M=0.2 at sea level

WCSA-30-00 0.146983 0.410894 0.647421 0.819315 Lift-To-Drag Ratio, CL/CD Analysis


WCSA-45-00 0.145856 0.410166 0.646656 0.822806 Table 3 and Figure 10, shown belowdisplayed the wings with
winglets have higher lift-to-drag ratio than wings without
winglet. The WCSA-45-00 has the highest lift-to-drag ratio,
CL/CD by about 9 to 11% along angle of attack comparing to
wing without winglet. This is followed by WCSA-30-00 which
is second highest lift-to-drag ratio, CL/CD by about 8.5 to 10 %
along angle of attack comparing to the wing without winglet. The
WCSA-00-00 configuration yields the third lowest lift-to-drag
ratio, CL/CD about 3.5% to 6.4% with angle of attack compare to
wing without winglet.

Table 3: Lift-To-Drag Ratio, CL/CD wing with winglet at cant angle 0, 30,
45 degree and sweep angle 0 degree

Winglet configuration α=0° α=4° α=8° α=12°


WCSA-00-00 8.94602 15.9351 13.26599 9.83703
Figure 8: Predicted lift coefficient, CL versus angle of attack, α, for WCSA-30-00 9.32196 16.7625 13.699 10.0229
Wing with winglet at cant angle 0, 30, 45 degree and sweep angle 0
WCSA-45-00 9.27925 16.8144 13.7075 10.0955
degree with M=0.2 at sea level

J Robot Mech Eng Resr 1(3). Page | 31


Citation: Eslam Said Abdelghany, Essam E Khalil, Osama E Abdellatif and Gamal elhariry (2016) Air Craft Winglet Design and Performance: Cant
Angle Effect. J Robot Mech Eng Resr 1(3): 28-34.

winglet at cant angle 0, 30, 45 degree and sweep angle 0 degree.


At angle of attack of 0 degree, the upper surface will create a
lower static pressure. The losses in pressure due to connection
between wing and winglet decrease with increase cant angle and
the pressure is more uniform, that’s decreasing drag. At angle
of attack of 12 degrees, the high intensity blue area located on
the upper surface decrease but lift is still capable of generating,
but most of the total force is directed backward as drag. For all
angles of attack, the results showed the low-pressure region on
the middle of wing, but at the tip of the wing, the minimum
pressure was larger than the minimum pressure at the root. The
lower pressure decreases from root to tip of wing then pressure
increases along winglet to reach the atmosphere pressure, that’s
reducing vortices at wing tip.
Figure 12 shows lower static pressure contours for wing with
Figure 10: Lift-to-drag ratio, CL/CD at various angle attack, α, for Wing
with winglet at cant angle 0, 30, 45 degree and sweep angle 0 degree
with M=0.2 at sea level
Static pressure Contours
Figure 11 shows upper static pressure contours for Wing with

Figure 11: Predicted upper static pressure contours for Wing Figure 12: Predicted lower static pressure contours for
with winglet at cant angle 0, 30, 45 degree and sweep angle 0 Wing with winglet at cant angle 0, 30, 45 degree and
degree with M=0.2 at sea level sweep angle 0 degree with M=0.2 at sea level

J Robot Mech Eng Resr 1(3). Page | 32


Citation: Eslam Said Abdelghany, Essam E Khalil, Osama E Abdellatif and Gamal elhariry (2016) Air Craft Winglet Design and Performance: Cant
Angle Effect. J Robot Mech Eng Resr 1(3): 28-34.

winglet at cant angle 0, 30, 45 degree and sweep angle 0 degree.


When the angle of attack increases, the lower surface will create
a higher static pressure. The high intensity red area located on
the lower surface suggests high lift is generated at high angle
of attack, α. For all angle of attack, it shows the high-pressure
region on the middle of wing, but at the tip of the wing, the high
pressure is lower than the high pressure at the root. The higher
pressure decreased from root to tip and along winglet to reach
the atmosphere pressure.
Pathlines
The difference in pressure between both upper and lower surface
of wing made the vortex. When angle of attack was increased, the
difference in pressure increased then the vortex and the drag of
wing was increased. The wing alone presents only one large vortex
at the wingtip as expected. The rotation sense is easily deductible
from pathlines. From this, one can realize that effectively fluid
has a wide tendency to go from lower to upper surfaces.
Figure 13 represents the pathlines view of flow over the studied Figure 14: Predicted particle pathlines, WCSA-45-00 at (a) angle of
attack 0 deg., (b) angle of attack 12 deg

due to connection between wing and winglet decrease, that’s


decreasing trailing vortices and drag. The trailing vortices occur
largely at maximum angle of attack when an airplane takes off. It
is found the trailing vortices reducing because, the presence of
the winglet, eliminates the downwash. The drag decreases in case
of wing with winglet than wing without winglet.
Conclusions
By utilization of CFD to predict the performance of the Numerical
Model of wing, large amount of time and money can be saved for
testing the wing in the wind tunnel. Calculations show that trends
of numerically-simulated curves are in excellent agreement with
trends of experimentally-obtained ones.
The pathlines showed how wingtip vortices occur and how
wing with winglet decrease wingtip vortices. Winglet with 0
degree sweep angle, when increasing the Cant angle 0, 30 and
45 degree, the lift coefficient was increased and drag coefficient
was decreased.
Figure 13: Predicted particle pathlines in case wing without winglet The wings with winglets have higher lift coefficient, CL than
at angle of attack 12 degree
wing without winglet by about 5% to 12% with angle of attack
wing without winglet at Mach number of 0.2 and angle of attack at WCSA 00-00.
of 12 degree. These pathlines are focused at the wingtip where It was found that the lowest drag coefficient; CD is for WCSA-
trailing vortices occurs. The trailing vortices occur greatly at 45-00 about 1.5% to 3.5% with angle of attack compared to wing
maximum angle of attack when an airplane takes off. without winglet.
Figure 14 represented the pathlines view of flow over the studied All wings with winglets are higher L/D than wings without
WCSA-45-00 at Mach number of 0.2 and angle of attack of 12 winglet. The WCSA-45-00 had the highest lift-to-drag ratio, CL/
degrees. These pathlines are focused at the wingtip where trailing CD by about 9 to 11% along angle of attack comparing to wing
vortices occur. The small trailing vortices are found in winglet without winglet.
tip and connection. When cant angle is increased, the losses

J Robot Mech Eng Resr 1(3). Page | 33


Citation: Eslam Said Abdelghany, Essam E Khalil, Osama E Abdellatif and Gamal elhariry (2016) Air Craft Winglet Design and Performance: Cant
Angle Effect. J Robot Mech Eng Resr 1(3): 28-34.

Nomenclature
x, y, z Cartesian coordinate components
b Span length of wing Greek Letters
C Chord length α Angle of attack

CL Lift coefficient ε Turbulence dissipation rate

CD Drag coefficient μ Dynamic viscosity


CM Moment coefficient ρ Density
E Total fluid energy List of Abbreviations
h Enthalpy AOA Angle of attack
Length
L AR Aspect ratio of wing
Lift force
Mach number
M CFD Computational Fluid Dynamics
Pitching moment
S Reference area
P Pressure value
R Radius
Re Reynolds number, Re = ρ U C / μ
t Time
T Temperature
u Instantaneous x direction velocity
v Instantaneous y direction velocity
w Instantaneous z direction Velocity

References 5. George WL, Alfred CD. Design and Analysis of Winglets for Military
Aircraft. Boeing Commercial Airplane Company, Technical Report
1. Thiede P. Aerodynamic Drag Reduction Technologies”, Proceedings
AFFDL-TR-76-6; 1975.
of the CEAS/DragNet European Drag Reduction Conference; 2000
Jun 19-21; Potsdam, Germany. vol. 76: Springer Verlag; 2001. 6. Beechook A, Wang J. Aerodynamic Analysis of Variable Cant Angle
Winglets for Improved Aircraft Performance. Proceedings of the
2. Hossain A, Rahman A, Iqbal P, Ariffin M, Mazian M. Drag Analysis of
19th International Conference on Automation & Computing; 2013
an Aircraft Wing Model with and without Bird Feather like Winglet.
Sep 13-14; Brunel University, London, UK.
International Journal of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering.
2012: 8-13. 7. Versteeg H, Malalasekera W. An Introduction to Computational
Fluid Dynamics: The Finite Volume Method. Longman; 1995.
3. Smith MJ, Komerath N, Ames R, Wong O. Performance Analysis of
A Wing with Multiple Winglets. American Institute of Aeronautics 8. FLUENT Documentation. © Fluent Inc. 2005.
and Astronautics (AIAA-2407); 2001. 9. Azlin MA, Mat Taib CF, Kasolang S, Muhammad FH. CFD Analysis
4. Cosin R, Catalano FM, Correa LGN, Entz RMU. Aerodynamic Analysis of Winglets at Low Subsonic Flow. World Congress on Engineering.
of Multi-Winglets for Low Speed Aircraft. 27th International 2011; 1: 1-5.
Congress of the Aeronautical Sciences; 2010.

J Robot Mech Eng Resr 1(3). Page | 34

You might also like